5 ms·

anyone would want to invent a time machine for a cool $5 billion dollars?? because that much Andrew Mason would pay you to get back to the table split seconds b

anyone would want to invent a time machine for a cool $5 billion dollars?? because that much Andrew Mason would pay you to get back to the table split seconds before he said "no" to Google's "we will pay you $6 billions for your website".

hkmurakami 15y ago
Why would Andrew Mason pay $5billion when the company is still worth $6.83B today? Giving away $5B to get the company's valuation to $6B would only make sense if Groupon were valued below $1B right now. (unless you're insinuating that in the near future, Groupon will be below this threshold, or even in bankruptcy)
- joering2 15y ago
  its only worth $6 on your favorite stock website, same way as I am telling you this post is worth $100B just because I say so. By the time they would find someone to buy it (had to announce somehow to find a buyer) and sign all the documents, the stock would be a penny one, with a market cap around $500MM. Groupon stink before IPO and it will make people shorting it extremely rich, and unless rules of basic math like 1+1=5 or rules of economy won't change overnight, this will be one of the biggest deadpool everyone post-internet era has seen! I already bought a popcorn.
xxbondsxx 15y ago
Rumor has it that Google got a look at their books during the negotiation and cancelled the deal. They publicly gave the story of groupon denying Google to allow them to save face and attract more investors
- OzzyB 15y ago
  That's very unnerving if it's true, because, by going along with "Groupon is worth $6bn because Google offered that to us and we turned it down", implies Google had a hand in creating that extremely high perception before their IPO. If Google did infact have the chance to look at the books (which I'm sure they did), and then allow that "$6bn meme" to circulate -- well, that's evil isn't it?
  - moocow01 15y ago
    I'd imagine in those negotiations there are agreements that everyone has to basically be tight lipped even after the deal falls apart. On the flip side, if Google had said too much it might make other business nervous to enter into negotiations with them in the future.
    - joe_the_user 15y ago
      Someone wasn't so tight lipped that the word didn't get out that they offered $6 billion for the company. If that wasn't true, someone in Google did have obligation to deny it - denying it off record with no further comment would hardly have been saying a lot.
  - moron 15y ago
    They would have gotten slimed with the evil moniker if they had decided to trash Groupon in the press. Damned if they [do|don't]. Adopting that slogan was one of the dumbest things they ever did, people love to bash them over the head with it.
  - Zarathust 15y ago
    I was not Google's job of sinking Groupon. It was also every investor's job to check the books before the IPO.
    - omi 15y ago
      Most IPOs are a bad deal for tech companies with easily replicateable business models. I wonder if P is ready to take the floor out.
  - jacquesm 15y ago
    Just three letters for you: NDA. To expand on that a bit: If google had made public what they thought they found they would have been very much open to a lawsuit with some significant chance of success. Breaking an NDA in such a situation is unheard of, every investor is supposed to make up their own mind and do their own homework before they decide to invest or not. Any legitimate concerns about this would revolve around the question of whether or not groupon was forthcoming in their pre-IPO filings. If there is any proof to be found with google you could try to persuade a judge to grant a subpoena of people at google familiar with the deal, but google should never by themselves reveal any of this. So: no, not evil.
mikeryan 15y ago
Actually most of the early investors who would have won in that deal got a lot of money out from the later stage investors and more in the IPO. I'm not sure they'd have made more in that deal. Honestly most of the folks invested early made a ton of money and now the guys at the backend are looking for a chair as the music ends.
sidman 15y ago
Is it possible that the dodgy side of groupon was seen earlier and predicted earlier by the google MnA team and it wasn't Andrew Mason that said "No" ? Im sure if nothing has changed since the early days of groupon till now, the skeletons now are still the same as before, google was just smart about it, did the math and said no way and allowed Andrew to walk away and speak about the deal however he wished. On another note, if groupon collapses is it a good thing for the daily deals market ie, more smaller ones take their place, better competition better monetization strategy or does it spell the end for this market ? What do people think ?

hkmurakami 15y ago

Why would Andrew Mason pay $5billion when the company is still worth $6.83B today? Giving away $5B to get the company's valuation to $6B would only make sense if Groupon were valued below $1B right now. (unless you're insinuating that in the near future, Groupon will be below this threshold, or even in bankruptcy)

joering2 15y ago
its only worth $6 on your favorite stock website, same way as I am telling you this post is worth $100B just because I say so. By the time they would find someone to buy it (had to announce somehow to find a buyer) and sign all the documents, the stock would be a penny one, with a market cap around $500MM. Groupon stink before IPO and it will make people shorting it extremely rich, and unless rules of basic math like 1+1=5 or rules of economy won't change overnight, this will be one of the biggest deadpool everyone post-internet era has seen! I already bought a popcorn.

xxbondsxx 15y ago

Rumor has it that Google got a look at their books during the negotiation and cancelled the deal. They publicly gave the story of groupon denying Google to allow them to save face and attract more investors

OzzyB 15y ago
That's very unnerving if it's true, because, by going along with "Groupon is worth $6bn because Google offered that to us and we turned it down", implies Google had a hand in creating that extremely high perception before their IPO. If Google did infact have the chance to look at the books (which I'm sure they did), and then allow that "$6bn meme" to circulate -- well, that's evil isn't it?
- moocow01 15y ago
  I'd imagine in those negotiations there are agreements that everyone has to basically be tight lipped even after the deal falls apart. On the flip side, if Google had said too much it might make other business nervous to enter into negotiations with them in the future.
  - joe_the_user 15y ago
    Someone wasn't so tight lipped that the word didn't get out that they offered $6 billion for the company. If that wasn't true, someone in Google did have obligation to deny it - denying it off record with no further comment would hardly have been saying a lot.
- moron 15y ago
  They would have gotten slimed with the evil moniker if they had decided to trash Groupon in the press. Damned if they [do|don't]. Adopting that slogan was one of the dumbest things they ever did, people love to bash them over the head with it.
- Zarathust 15y ago
  I was not Google's job of sinking Groupon. It was also every investor's job to check the books before the IPO.
  - omi 15y ago
    Most IPOs are a bad deal for tech companies with easily replicateable business models. I wonder if P is ready to take the floor out.
- jacquesm 15y ago
  Just three letters for you: NDA. To expand on that a bit: If google had made public what they thought they found they would have been very much open to a lawsuit with some significant chance of success. Breaking an NDA in such a situation is unheard of, every investor is supposed to make up their own mind and do their own homework before they decide to invest or not. Any legitimate concerns about this would revolve around the question of whether or not groupon was forthcoming in their pre-IPO filings. If there is any proof to be found with google you could try to persuade a judge to grant a subpoena of people at google familiar with the deal, but google should never by themselves reveal any of this. So: no, not evil.

mikeryan 15y ago

Actually most of the early investors who would have won in that deal got a lot of money out from the later stage investors and more in the IPO. I'm not sure they'd have made more in that deal. Honestly most of the folks invested early made a ton of money and now the guys at the backend are looking for a chair as the music ends.

sidman 15y ago

Is it possible that the dodgy side of groupon was seen earlier and predicted earlier by the google MnA team and it wasn't Andrew Mason that said "No" ? Im sure if nothing has changed since the early days of groupon till now, the skeletons now are still the same as before, google was just smart about it, did the math and said no way and allowed Andrew to walk away and speak about the deal however he wished. On another note, if groupon collapses is it a good thing for the daily deals market ie, more smaller ones take their place, better competition better monetization strategy or does it spell the end for this market ? What do people think ?